tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN August 3, 2010 1:00pm-5:00pm EDT
blinder, as having a significant impact on insuring that the death of our recession did not reach the great depression. >> do you agree with zandi that the tax cut should not be allowed to expire within the middle of a recession? >> the president agrees we should not raise taxes on the middle-class. but the president believes that adding $700 billion to our deficit for tax cuts for those making in excess of $250,000 per year -- we disagree on that. >> [inaudible] >> again, this is the debate we had during the campaign in which we now know which with the participants line up. you hear this a lot during this debate -- will raise taxes on --
just as we said during the campaign that, about 2% of small businesses fall into that category. so when you hear -- let's be clear, this is not about small- business because if you were for cutting taxes on small business, would be holding up a small business tax bill and the u.s. senate right now? would you be holding up the bill that allows them to deduct more of the business and equipment if you really do support small business? would you be holding up the bill that eliminates their capital gains taxno, right? because you are for small business -- except if you're not. i would say that they use the moniker of small business when it fits their political agenda. but in reality, this is not something that will impact on
90% of small businesses. it will not have a majority of families. the president believes we ought to protect those in the middle class. >> has the white house heard the mother reports that the white house has heard from various democrats [inaudible] -- has the white house heard from people who have suggested that? what you think that is? >> chip, we will help people where we think we can help them the most. that is largely, has largely been -- has been held was when the president campaigned for democrats as a center, when he was running for the senate in 2004, and held most what houses do with political requests. >> [inaudible] >> i do not necessarily believe --
where are we on that staloff is there going to be a house benefit at some point? -- where are we on that? is there going to be a house benefit at some point? >> there will be a series of fines. there will be a fine that the government requires bp to pay that will be based off of the amount of pollution put into the gulf coast, which i would think would be a substantial fine. in addition to that, and i can check on the exact process, natural resource damage assessments would be made. bp is liable for the damage it
has caused to the environment, which is different from a penalty from the pollution admitted. the secretary is working through the process of gulf coast restoration. we sent his report to the president some time in the last part of september. >> are we talking about billions of dollars? >> i think that the penalty on the oil ltd., if i am not mistaken, that penalty goes to the treasury. the damage assessments will be without having a lot of backing on this. there will be a substantial penalty based on the damage that the pollution has caused.
>> the president and is that -- the president's family will not be with them? >> it is safe to say that, of course, he will miss them. he has a daughter at camp that he has already spoken to. they will all be back together soon. i am not going to get into that. welcome to the front row. >> if i could follow up on the question from jennifer, secretary timothy geithner's office has put out numbers on increased savings rates. does the president believe that there is an of good economic news to get people to half of the 9.5% unemployment rate?
>> i do not think secretary guy there in his own of bed -- secretary timothy geithner error in his op-ed did not believe that it presented serious challenges. i do not think that anyone thought that, despite the progress made in where we were and where we came through, i do not think that anyone is satisfied that we had made enough or were out of the woods. we will get jobs numbers, i will stipulate as i have for many months that i do not see those numbers. before they are announced. i do not know what this month's numbers will show. our hope is that we will build
up positive private-sector job growth for the seventh month in a row as a positive sign. is the economy adding jobs as fast as we would like? of course not. one of the things that would be a good antidote to where we are is to pass the small-business bill for investment by small businesses and provide them the credit that they need. >> given the economic difficulties, they said the tone of the president's comments are that he seems to have abandoned the politics of wholesome and appealing more to the democratic base.
for example, yesterday that the dnc fund-raiser, talking about as he has in the past whether or not we should give the keys to the republicans and with the car in reverse. -- put the car in reverse. what does all are in the stand for, republican and we j.f.r sa -- r and d stand for? rivers and drive or republican and democrat? >> both. i think that the pleasant -- president believes that there is a choice that will be made of. -- made. it is exemplified in the analogy he is using. will we go backwards to the types of policies that led us to
the greatest economic calamity that most of us have ever seen or will we continue to go forward? understand the agenda of those on capitol hill. let's say, for instance, that the last piece of reform that the president put in place was financial reform. new rules for the way that wall street and banks operate. a fine thing to debate this fall. >> is concerned that this will turn of independent voters? >> i think that independent voters want more rules for the road. if you look at the tone of the president's remarks in the auto factory on friday, the premise
is not to bet against the american worker. you will hear that a lot in the fall. >> [inaudible] [laughter] >> i did not ask you to read them. [laughter] >> on letting the bush tax cuts expire, given the economic difficulties, with the administration be open to phasing out the tax cuts for the wealthiest americans? >> our viewpoint is that for the wealthiest americans, i do not think that the wealthiest amongst us have felt the tide of economic downturn that the middle class experienced. as we said, adding those on,
continuing them, at $700 billion to the debt. >> [inaudible] [inaudible] >> the president's viewpoint is to protect the middle class, led tax cuts for the wealthy expire. >> he did say that one of the strongest points the government made in defense of the health care individual mandate was that it derived from the government's power to tax. in pressing the legal argument in court that the individual mandate is a tax, is the administration acknowledging a tax on everyone? >> i would go back to something like the example of car insurance.
we all pay a tax but we do not all have health care. you pay tax on health care premiums, instead of health care paying for the bill you go to the emergency room. the president believed, and this was not a physician that he originally took, but he believed that we would bring down health- care costs. >> you are acknowledging that it is a cap? -- a tax? >> the president believes that we will have the savings that we need if we are going that the types of benefits that we know can come from this. >> is a violation of trust? >> i think that the president has spoken fairly clearly to the reasons for making sure that each of us has.
>> the trip to spain with the first lady and sasha, what portion of that is paid for by the taxpayers? >> it is a private trip and is being paid for that way. >> the afl-cio, will he reassure them that free trade agreements involved strictly rules to protect american workers? >> the president believes that we all have rules in place to make sure that trade works for everyone in america. that is what the president has pledged to present an agreement that made sense for the auto industry, made sense for the beef industry, not simply passing along a free trade
agreements that existed before. the president believes, and i think that if you look at the gdp numbers or any reasonable economic growth plan in the future, they both have to increase their exports. here is a good example. this is sort of in the realm of concerns we have had about the free-trade agreement with the bush administration. look, because of help that ford is getting from the department of energy, the president got money to help retool. allowing the ford explorer to be built on a car frame, not a truck frame, meaning that the car itself is more fuel-
efficient, which is a gateway to their business plan calling for specific marketing this far. by the way, they just that of 1200 jobs at that facility -- they just added 1200 jobs at that facility. >> will he make any new assurances? >> and i have not seen the draft of his speech in total. i think that the president will talk about the decisions made and where we are going forward. >> what kind of reassurance can the administration offered to the people living in the gulf coast that once you have the ultimate solution for the relief
well that the government and bp are not going to leave bill long-haul of government cleanup -- leave the long haul for the government to clean up. >> the d p decision to change ceo's, many opportunities have been taken for the chance. telling bp that they cannot leave, reassuring people that we are in the gulf for the long haul. cap has been our most immediate project. that does not, as you say, allowing us to and this government will not walk away from the obligations to continue cleaning up the damage, building
pp for that damage -- bp for that damage. continuing to work to implement the escrow fund for not just the environmental but the economic damages caused by the spill in that region. i would think that we would all agree, that we do all agree, that what has happened requires our continued focus long past capping that well. our commitment is to continue to do so. >> is there an initial dollar estimate or time estimate? >> let me see what type of
updated figure there is. in the cancer, some of it will likely come in his report later. yes, ma'am? >> senator mcconnell said that today [unintelligible] political move re-election [unintelligible] reelected in 2012. do you have any reaction to that? >> did he not later in the interview surmise that we should take a look at the 14th amendment? my hunch is that it is based on politics. the president and the justice department were concerned about creating a patchwork of immigration policies.
the case to be made to the court in arizona was just that, the court ruled that arizona and other states cannot and should not create a patchwork of immigration laws throughout the country. it was not an argument based on anything other than a legal argument. honestly, a legal argument that the justice department's proved. >> so, the idea that there will be a long-term benefit for democrats melody legs this goes of gypsum political question. the president has made a lot of decisions. i think that if you look at the polling on this decision, the numbers are not exactly with us. if we made decisions based on politics or polling, we would get a new pollster.
the democratic national convention as a pollster. the decisions are made based on what is best for the country, not politics. >> you also said that elizabeth warren of would be a controversial nominee. >> based on what? >> [inaudible] >> i do not know what he bases that on. >> saying that she could be a controversial patent. that she might not get enough votes. >> based on? >> ok. [inaudible] >> i believe it is at the convention center. >> why is the president meeting with them? >> i think that working men and women are an important part of this country and the president
looks forward to speaking tomorrow with the executive council as he has done on a number of occasions. >> human rights lawyers bar-chen -- challenging the assertion that he lit -- americans can be targeted for killing overseas. should americans be worried that if they go overseas their own government will target them? >> i think that he just largely said that tourists going overseas are somehow analogous in nature to [unintelligible] >> an american city and reduces an affiliated with a -- >> let's be clear, anwar al alaki has in videos cast his lot with al qaeda and its extremist allies.
he is acting as a regional commander for al qaeda in the regional -- arabian peninsula. a tourist going to italy, we should not equate him to someone who has a in countless videos pledged to uphold and support the violent and murderous series of al qaeda. >> identifying people as terrorists in recent years? >> it is hard to imagine an issue in which two things have been completed more in -- and your question. i think that the notion that somehow anyone in this country travels overseas and the role that al alaki had in inciting
violence, they are not in the same ballpark. >> [unintelligible] >> i just answered his question about comparing joe the tourist to anwar al alaki. >> u.s. citizens are entitled to certain judicial process. is there a process in place that we do not know about? >> there is a process in place that i am not at liberty to discuss. >> turning to the tension in the middle east, if it becomes an all-out war, with the u.s. come to mutual perception deterrent? >> hypothetical they hear. -- day here.
i will not get into discussing what if there is an all-out war in the middle east. since getting and office the president has talked about pulling back from those kinds of missions. i have countless times stated our long-held, countrywide position of protecting the security of israel and its people. the white house and its people will continue to do so. >> [inaudible] >> nothing new. obviously friday and saturday every year they have been held by the arabian -- iranian government. the president continues to call for their release. >> the president has been trying his best to include those that
do not support the u.s. and terrorism. [inaudible] will support the u.s. from el on. >> i will give you largely by gave last week on this, which is i think that if you look at the progress we have made with pakistan on confronting terrorists, that is a record that they can be proud of it and we can be proud of. does more have to be done? unquestionably. we have tough work ahead in pakistan and afghanistan.
together with our partners will make progress. >> first of all, happy birthday to the president. the second question is on immigration. >> i have a follow-up. [laughter] >> george and peter, i will put them down as no happy birthday. [laughter] >> on immigration, most of the free-speech around the country is against the immigration law. it could bring more violence that is out of the hands of police around the country. >> obviously the court has ruled and stated many of the provisions that they were set to
going to last thursday. many communities will express reservations around what this will do. where it leaves us is the same place that leaves us -- left us last week. the senator brought up in it -- immigration earlier. if you would like to solve a problem by continuing to talk about one that we have not solve that a federal level for many years, it is time to bring together democrats and republicans to do just that.
that is the only way wilmot -- we will make progress on comprehensive immigration reform. >> [inaudible] has she been witreceiving her fl salary? >> i do not know. i would point you to the department of justice. >> for the last couple of weeks you put the president out there [unintelligible] update on the auto bailout. [unintelligible]
iraq speech yesterday. [unintelligible] polling data on that scale for the administration. >> i will leave it to gallop to explain. >> [inaudible] >> i [laughter] guess] -- i guess. [laughter] >> is it frustrating to the president of these messages seem to not be getting through to people? why not? >> i do not think that the president spends a lot of time worried about how we make progress in terms of giving him credit for the progress. >i said this last week.
i would not hold the auto investment against the american people because i do not think that the story has been told. i do nothing to the american people knew that for the first time in 10 years we were adding jobs to the auto industry that for the first time since 2004 it posted an operating profit. before that the money invested by this administration was likely to be paid in full. i think that in many ways the story of where we started or where we began late in march of 2009 and where we are late july of 2010 is a much different place. the president believes and hopes that weather is adding jobs in the auto industry or taking soldiers out of iraq, i
think that the president only hopes that people look at what he has done and base their conclusions of that. >> as long as the product is 9.5%, can you get around that? >> if you thought that your economic situation was not as good as it could be, too expensive to send your daughter to college, someone else in your family just lost a job, i do not think that he would be surprised, the american people would not be concerned. >> how do you get around that? >> two things, the first being
to continue to tell the american people what we're doing and the choices we are making. i do not think a lot of people have the totality of the auto story. i do not know how many people know that we are at the lowest point in i do not know how many years in troop levels in iraq. if you look at civilian deaths, likely to be the number of civilian deaths in iraq in 2010 and what they were at the height of the iraq war, we are talking about a reduction of 92%. that is what the president's job is, continuing to tell people. >> crack cocaine is down from 100 to one to 18 to one.
what is this administration's effort on that pushed? [inaudible] >> let me see if there's any guidance. i will say this, the signing of today's bill into law represents the hard work of democrats and republicans. this is a good example of coming together and making progress on something that people had identified as a glaring blight on the law. look, if you look at the people that were at the signing their not of the political persuasion. it demonstrates the glaring nature of what these penalties
had done to people and how unfair the work. >> senate republicans are being blamed for holding off for delaying the staloff -- standalone vote for black farmers. they want to be assured that they will be paid their settlement money, which is being likened it to the assurances given by blanche lincoln. >> this administration has worked a lot over the past seven months and the administration
will continue to do that. >> [inaudible] >> recently with valerie jarrett. >> [inaudible] >> i do not have any knowledge that that is on the schedule. margaret? >> do you have any information about what is on deck for friday in terms of [inaudible] >> off of the top of my head, i do not. >> this may have been asked earlier, but there is a lawsuit being brought today, in terms of what they are not at liberty to discuss, is that a government
>> [inaudible] >> without getting deep into this, the president understands the process and will do all that is necessary to keep this country say. >> the tax cuts, [inaudible] >> yes. >> is pakistan not allowed to export terrorism? >> i will let mr. cameron deal with that. >> the president said he was ready for iran to talk. >> obviously iran has, on a
number of occasions, change their positions largely on the pain that they are feeling in sanctions based on decisions the government has made. we have always said that we would be willing to sit down and discuss the iranian nuclear program. if they are serious about doing that. to date that seriousness has not been there. iran has a obligations that it needs to fulfill. failure to meet those obligations will continue to result in unilateral sanctions by this government. un sanctions that have been passed. european union's sanctions that have been passed. and other countries beyond those in route -- unilateral
sanctions. or else the iranian government would not be changing its position so often about discussing its programming. >> [inaudible] >> we leave this press conference with robert gibbs, the white house spokesperson. the senate has begun debate on the elena kagan nomination to be the next approved for justice. a final vote is expected later this week. you can watch live coverage of the debate on c-span 2. a reminder that we have an archival materials from the nomination and judiciary committee hearings. starting later today we will break down the debate into individual speakers so that you can see what your senator has to say on the nomination. that is accurate c-span.org --
that is that c-span.org -- that is at c-span.org/kagan. today is primary day in kansas, missouri, and michigan. we will have complete coverage tonight on the c-span networks. >> every weekend in august, "book tv" brings its book festival round the country. see talk-show host tammy bruce in los angeles and christopher higgins in new york next weekend. later in the month, the harlem festival, the annual meeting of historians and librarians, and freedom festival, on c-span 2. for a full listing, go to book tv.org. the c-span networks, we provide coverage of politics, public affairs, nonfiction books, in american history. it is all available to you on
television, on-line, social networking sites, and online through our video library. we are taking c-span on the road with our mobile content vehicle, bringing our resources to your community. washington your way, now available in 1 million homes. created by cable as a public service. >> we bring you now a portion of "washington journal" from this morning, on the announcement to withdraw troops from iraq, the status of the iraqi readiness, and the possible consequences of falling out u.s. troops. host: we will be talking about the withdrawal of troops from iraq and the announcement that the president made yesterday with richard weitz of the hudson institute. first we want to check in with jane in iraq this morning with "the christian science monitor."
caller: thank you. host: support waning for the war, lowest since taking office according to the report. how are iraqis responding to the president's announcement? caller: there is nothing much new here in the streets of baghdad. u.s. officials here frankly take every opportunity to say they are on track in their leaving. the fear is that there is so much uncertainty about what will happen when the troops drawdown. $50,000 by the end of this month. host: "the wall street journal ," president obama declared an
end to the war on august 31, it does not mean the end to the american commitment in iraq." what do the iraqis expect to see as far as support in non-combat operations? caller: certainly, what they would like to see is the commitment that the u.s. will not abandon them. it is a given that the iraqis do not want to see u.s. soldiers in their streets, no one does. but they also do not want to see the u.s. cut and run. there is a certain fear about what happens after they leave. we are seeing a spike in violence. might not be a sustainable trend, but what has been going on today with five policemen were killed, placing it in a
major neighborhood, possibly even more uncertain and unsettled. host: do you get the feeling that they're concerned not only about the withdrawal of u.s. troops but also about the functioning of things happening outside of the elliptical grid? supply of goods and services, that kind of thing? caller: absolutely. that is perhaps even more of a preoccupation and the violence going on -- than the violence going on. many people only have a few hours of electricity each day. so many people do not have jobs. five months after the polls, they still do not have a government. a lot of the things that they have from f f -- they have been
promised have not panned out yet. what it means is that there are a range of things that need that have been. host: jane arraf, thank you so much for being on this morning. caller: my pleasure, thank you. host: here in the studio to continue the discussion is richard weitz of the hudson institute. welcome. guest: thank you for having me. host: your thoughts on the president's speech yesterday? guest: given his location, it made sense that he spent a lot of time talking about veterans benefits, particularly those that served in iraq. he spent a bit more time on laying out his strategy for afghanistan rather than iraq.
there is still uncertainty of how things will the ball after the u.s. troops leave, particularly in the diplomatic realm. yesterday's talks began with his strategy in afghanistan and how it it fits into dealing with al qaeda. certainly what has been presented is a speech to deal with iraq. host: we do want to show a part of that speech, after he announced a new strategy for iraq and the follow-through. >> shortly after taking office i announce our new strategy for iraq and for a transition to full iraqi responsibility. i made it clear that by august 31, 2010, american combat missions in iraq would end. [applause] that is exactly what we are
doing. as promised and on schedule. [applause] host: richard weitz, the headline in "the philadelphia inquirer," pullout is on track, forces leaving on schedule." are you in agreement? guest: for the most part. due to the start -- a change in strategy in 2008, we have seen what looks to be a successful transition to pretty much an iraqi military. even after the end of this month there will still be 50,000 troops there. although they are trained as advisers and trainers, they can engage in, if necessary. it looks like what we will see is a series of strikes that i do
not think the iraqi forces can prevent, but it will not be a major threat to the durability of the government and so on. host: we are speaking with richard weitz on the u.s. troop withdrawal in iraq. if you would like to get involved in that conversation, for republicans, 202-737-0001. for democrats, 202-737-0002. for independents, 202-628-0205. as always you can send us a message through twitter or e- mail. you mentioned terrorist attacks. from your observation, what effect will the president's announcement have? guest: there is a group that called themselves al qaeda in iraq, it has always been a question as to what extent they are actually connected to al qaeda. it looks like around 2008 they were pretty much defeated by the
surge. what they have been doing since are simple terror strikes, they are not a major political force. there is speculation on having seen an uptick recently, with such a lot of casualties. it is hard for me to envision how it would conduct an operation against the united states like we have seen in afghanistan before september 2001. host: in "the philadelphia inquirer," "president obama confirmed that combat troops would leave by the end of august as promised and on schedule as the united states moves to a support role in a country still dealing with violence and a fractured government." the first call for this conversation comes from
sarasota, florida. brian, independent line, go ahead. caller: first-time caller, been trying to get in for my three years. so glad to get through. i am glad that obama is keeping his word on troop withdrawal. i will vote for him again. the only way that he can lose me as a voter is off the main reason i voted for him is the 2% wealthiest americans. those people are just sitting on american jobs. they are not running companies, they are not producing jobs. i see these rich people in sarasota every day. host: we are talking about the u.s. troop withdrawal of iraq. would you like to make a comment or ask a question? caller: i just want to say -- all right. host: let's move on to king mountain, democratic line, jim.
caller: i am an old vietnam veteran. in the reporting of the news, so much is about finding out what is going on with what the government is trying to do, i think that is the biggest problem with what is going on in america today. everyone reporting about being out there on the front line, some things need to remain secret. i think that we need to just report the news. host: your thoughts on the president and the administration laying out their plans this far in advance? guest: it makes sense. some of this is binding in a legal agreement that the u.s. has with iraq that allows forces to stay until the end of next year. unless that changes, they will likely withdraw and the military
functions would be on short-term visits or run out of the diplomatic military section of the embassy. host: jerry, chantilly, welcome. caller: i think that yesterday's speech to the manager of the president talking about afghanistan's so much, he did not want to talk about the draw down because of the comments that were made earlier, talking about the promises that were made that we have not fulfilled in terms of the democratic government there. the people there have a longer view of history there than they do here. over time they have gone in and come out on multiple occasions, regardless of who the president is.
in america we have fulfilled the mission without a sustained effort. host: richard weitz? guest: what the president is confronted with is a series of important issues that are hard to prioritize. a successful transition in iraq is important. but afghanistan, which he spoke about yesterday, is becoming more problematic. the iraqi forces have developed to the point where we think that they can maintain order without a major u.s. troop presence. that is not at all the case in afghanistan. the conference that took place last month, they have pulled back on what they hoped would be the transition in 2014. north korea, iran, a lawyer -- relations with china, he has to figure out where to place our assets. iraq has been a successful strategy so people feel comfortable about him lowering
the u.s. military presence. host: drexel, missouri, independent line, go ahead. caller: is a good idea to pull some of the troops out of iraq, but what if we let some there? in this independent iraqi state, it would be a good idea to leave some of the troops there to provide -- protect them from the theocracies surrounding them. but what is to stop them from attacking iraq like they did israel? if another one pops up, they might feel threatened and decide to attack. .
the ethnic groups. they can be a bit of a buffer. but they are going to make clear that it will take place within the iraqi chain of command. that also goes with any possible basing beyond 2011. it would have to be something the sovereign government of iraq would want to have. there is one reason, they are
concerned about iran or some other country. they might. it depends. the might feel more comfortable without that. we will have to say. host: some numbers from the associated press regarding troop levels in iraq. october, 2007, was a peak with 170,000 troops. now, back down to 70,000 troops. confirmed u.s. deaths -- those numbers from the associated press. caller: this is my first time calling. i am glad the president pull them out of iraq.
i am a vietnam veteran. i am with president obama all the way, pull them out of there. bring them home. host: what d.c. as a difference between the withdrawal of troops from -- what do you see as the difference between the withdrawal of troops in iraq and the withdrawal of troops in vietnam? caller: we would be right back with them now. host: thank you for your call. do you want to comment on that? guest: i would like to thank the veterans who called them for their service. vietnam was not an easy war. there is a parallel. in vietnam, we tried the same strategy of leaving the south vietnamese forces in charge of the country as we withdrew.
that failed. the south vietnamese were not able to withstand what had become a conventional war with the north vietnamese. the u.s. succeeded in defeating the insurgency, but the north vietnamese regular forces intervened and a overwhelmed the south. you do not have the problem in iraq. the intervened and the statement afghanistan. there are ties between the insurgency. host: we have a message via twitter. guest: there are some who leave that. the u.s. will never leave. it is not so much the iraqis and people in neighboring countries. but the united states and iraq
have signed an agreement that the u.s. forces can stay until the end of next year. it has to be something the iraqi government wants to keep. this administration is not eager to leave troops there. they would reconsider, as we have seen in afghanistan. but they will probably pull all of them because they need them elsewhere. host: we heard that five months after the election, the iraqis have not put together a government. how much of that is based on the fact that u.s. forces are still there? or is that something completely different? guest: that might be a factor in that if they were left to their own devices, there would be more of an incentive to compromise, you could argue. the primary problem is that the way the society is divided.
often you have people the vote for kurdish parties. there is a broader group. they appear to have support among shiites. the constitution encourages multi-party coalition's. it has taken a long time to form a government. we have also seen this in europe and the netherlands. host: next up is brian from lorida on our line from democrats. you're on the line. go-ahead, brian. brian? go ahead, sir. caller: yes. host: do you have a question? from move on to anne frank atlantic city, new jersey. you are on the "washington journal."
caller: mr. weitz made a good comment about the war in vietnam. i am a combat veteran. the iraqi war was a tobacco to begin with. going over there. it caused us problems -- the toqi war was a tobdebacle begin with. no matter what obama does, in the end, i think iraq will revert back to its problem-type situation in the middle east. the 50,000 troops stayed behind. it reminds me of germany. we're going to be there forever now. god knows how much it is going to cost. i do not think we will get anything accomplished in the middle east and putting troops on the ground when we could be
using intelligence to do our job for us. guest: thank you for your service. the intelligence is a key. the caller is correct in that one substitute you can use for a large number of troops -- we games supporte a game to ♪ from the troops. the original invasion of iraq was because of faulty intelligence. but we're hopeful things can get better. the wikileak suggest there is uncertainty about that whole region in general. host: we have more from the president's speech yesterday to disabled veterans in atlanta. the headline in "the baltimore
sun," we want to show you more of what he had to say about the new u.s. role. >> we have not seen the end of the american sacrifice in iraq. but make no mistake. our commitment is changing from a military effort led by our troops to a civilian effort led by our diplomats. as we mark the end of four combat mission, a grateful america must pay tribute to all who served there. host: we are talking about u.s. troop withdrawal from iraq with richard weitz from the hudson institute. good morning, jimmy. go ahead. caller: my comment has to do with the violence and iraq. it remains relatively high. it seems it would be to the
benefit of those folks who want u.s. troops out of iraq to moderate the level of violence because continuing the violence gives ammunition to individuals who are opposed to troop withdrawal. could you comment on why they seem to be doing what appears to be counter to their goals, and if their goal is to have u.s. troops out of iraq. guest: that appears to be with the afghan taliban would do, wait out until the foreign troops leave. there are two possible outcomes. one is that the insurgents are concerned that they want to maintain they are still an active force and need to play a role. there is also a conspiracy theory that some of the bombings are due to various iraq factions various they're trying to keep
the troops there. it is a bit hard to tell. it is probable that it might be both forces and acted because insurgents are probably divided by various groups. host: richard weitz is the director for military analysis at the institute. he has been with the hudson institute since 2003. weapons of mass destruction and nonproliferation policies and he is our guest for the next 20 minutes. jefferson, ga.. are we after weapons? i am hearing we are in afghanistan iraq afghanistan for some of the oil and minerals in the ground.
is there any truth for that? guest: as far as i am aware, not so much. there would be no reason to invade or occupied the country to get oil. they are quite happy to sell oil on the open market. afghanistan has newly discovered minerals. it looks like the chinese are taking that. it does not appear to have been a factor from will little i know about the decision to intervene here originally. i did not think it will affect future policy. host: next up is sarah in jefferson, ga. i am sorry, we have joan in buffalo, new york, on our line for independents. tony in daytona, florida.
caller: i want to comment on the same sentiment that the other gentleman was talking about earlier. the intel on the ground would be better, a decision as far as keeping all of those troops in there. we have been in with the people that do not think the way that we think and do not run the country the way we run our country. they are violent people. it is high time we get out of there and we should do the same thing in afghanistan, as well. guest: the president said we are leaving iraq. the intent is to withdraw u.s. troops from afghanistan. the fear is, and people can argue either way, if u.s. troops
leave afghanistan without a stable government in place, the taliban may or may not take control of the country but it will be hard to keep al qaeda out. you have other places, too. we cannot know. history differs. you can learn one experiment and change 1 verbal and run it again. having u.s. troops in, running it, without u.s. troops and seeing the outcome. we have to take an educated guess about the outcome. host: there is an op-ed in "the new york post" -- "will bam lose iraq?" we will take a look of that and more comments from richard
weitz. >> officers and sailors of the uss aabraham lincoln. major operations in iraq have ended. the united states and our allies have prevailed. [cheers] [applause] and now our collation is securing that -- and now out coalition is securing their country. parallels between the speeches? guest: president obama was forthright that there will be continued problems and
continued casualties. i think the administration is being honest to the american people that we may not see the end of our problems there. he devoted more attention to afghanistan because afghanistan will be more of a problem even though u.s. troop levels in iraq is going down, it is increasing in afghanistan. it will probably stay at that high level for awhile. host: we have a message from twitter. your thoughts. guest: i am not sure they are taking troops from iraq and moving them to afghanistan. but that is correct, there are people who voted for the president because they thought he would end both wars. but i think he was clear that although he wanted to and iraq,
he did not approve of the original mission and heath did not think we needed to stay there. the consider afghanistan a good work and they will keep troops in there as long as possible. the caller is correct. the administration has been honest about that and still feel it is a worthwhile policy. host: we continue our conversation with richard weitz from the hudson institute. republican line. caller: first i wanted to say i do not see much of a difference in his foreign policy between our president now and george bush. i voted for bush in 2004. i voted for obama in 2008 because of the war. now i feel this saber rattling with iran.
are we drawing down our troops to make another strategic move in our grand chess game that we play? we really need to get at the root of the problem. it is our foreign policy. we need to get out of art for the engagements. guest: i think the caller is correct. there are continuities. iraq, they continued to draw down. afghanistan, they continue what has taken place under president bush. in iran, they made a sincere effort to reach out with a series of gestures. they offered various compromises. iran -- the election was contested.
they are now relying on the sanctions policy. the europeans have joined suit. that is probably what the bush administration wants, as well. president obama has said military force is still on the table. it is unlikely that will occur because a series of problems. we do not think we could destroy all the nuclear facilities. you might have to do what was done with iraq in 2003. i do not think that the u.s. military or many people are comfortable with another invasion so soon. there are limits on american power. we have to prioritize. the hope is that the sanctions and pressure will induce a change for policy in iran.
host: go ahead. caller: there was mention of only 50 al qaeda in afghanistan at this time. it seems like a lot of energy and effort being put there. i think i remember there was a general jones back in the bush administration who said there were only 500 al qaeda it there, yet we were putting a lot of forces in their, supposedly taking out saddam hussein's regime, but we still tied everything into whatever we were doing as a link between saddam hussein and al qaeda. i am wondering, why isn't the question being asked about what
we're focusing amount was on 50 but when the journal said there were 500, we had maximum -- when the general said there were 500, we had maximum forces. i am a vietnam veteran. the reason i think we are still having these wars, we should look at how many generals that we had in the mmilitary and what their responsibilities were. host: we will leave it there. guest: thank you for your service. the problem with al qaeda, we knew al qaeda after 2001. they were a core group of fanatics and were trying to overthrow local governments and decided they would attack the united states. we drove most of them out of
iraq, afghanistan. there was a movement with al qaeda in iraq. it was probably true without. we had the same problem in the cold war. local groups were identified as communists. so become this? maybe they were pro chinese. some may be emulating and we're not sure what their capabilities are in hitting the united states. there may be a small number of al qaeda in afghanistan now, but there are probably a lot across the border in pakistan. the fear was that would go back into afghanistan if the security situation decrees. host: "mission accomplished,"
obama boasted. obama it was benefiting from a strategy formed under george bush. this is what mcconnell had to say on the floor of the senate yesterday. >> a strategy, the surge, and the awakening. we had to prevail on many votes for withdrawal and fights over whether or not we would have ongoing combat operations. all of which led to the agreement and the security agreement between the u.s. and iraq to governments, executed in the previous administration, by the way, that outlined the drawdown of forces, the president announced today. the rockies must work through the -- the iraqis must work through that.
general petraeus worked to build the security forces and defeat the taliban. the surge helped create the conditions that resulted between our countries, which took a lot of hard work. some started to not be achieved in 2007. the credit goes to general petraeus, our fighting forces, emboss other crocker -- and possiblambassador crocker. host: the administration take more credit for the success of military operations in iraq then they should? guest: i did not interpret them taking credit. i think he gave credit to the troops. he said he filled his campaign vow which was to reduce the
troops below 50,000 by the end of this month. the president talked about the success of the surge. you can argue -- i think they both deserve credit host:. next up, tennessee -- host: next up, tennessee. caller: richard, can you hear me? ok, look in the camera and tell me, this is the subject i want to talk about. the man in the white house has criticized president bush for everything in the world. now he is taking credit for what president bush negotiated a long time ago with the iraqi government and then he just got
up and said he wasn't taking credit. he is a hypocrite. you know that. richard. trouth, host: go ahead, richard weitz. guest: it is true that president obama was critical of president bush during the campaign and they continued to criticize some of the policies. but to be fair, the current administration has not focused on the bush administration in terms of policy. they are continuing many of the elements of that policy. host: cincinnati, ohio. caller: hello? veronica. how are you this morning? host: just fine.
caller: why don't they bring all the troops home from iraq and afghanistan and pakistan? just bring them all home. i am tired of the killing every day. just bring them all home. withdraw from afghanistan and pakistan. host: thank you for your call, veronica. give us your sense of the grand scheme of this administration as far as pulling the troops out of iraq, but going forward in afghanistan and then pulling the troops out of afghanistan. guest: a very 60,000-foot level, there is a broad strategy that iraq has increased the number of forces under president bush and defeated the insurgency and now allows for a reduction of
forces now appeared in afghanistan, it is the same with increasing the number of u.s. forces to defeat the insurgents and that would create conditions so that you could pull them out. in the broader level, the administration has recognized there are other challenges that the united states faces in this world. at some point, the art disengaging the number of combat forces in -- they are disengaging the number of combat forces iraq and afghanistan. host: galveston, texas. caller: i come from a military background family. my father and his brother served in vietnam. i'm curious on what they are in fear as us pulling out of
afghanistan and iraq right now. these people are such radicals. they do not have their own kids -- they will have their own kids blow themselves up to take out u.s. troops. what will be the probability of these radicals using that as a step in our own back of being able to tell these -- as a stab in our own back of being able to tell their own people that the americans are on the run and we need to hit them when they are down. guest: that is an excellent question. people are struggling with this. we understand there are a lot of people who want to harm americans and others who are based in that region. the reason people attribute --
economic problems. some say it is because of the american presence. we just do not know what happened. and so the bush administration and the current administration are reluctant to do that. the fear is that you could have a negative resurgence of radicalism in that region that could launch attacks on the united states and other people. host: charles from connecticut on the republican line. caller: i have a question about al qaeda. i am guessing they are one of the main enemies and one of the reasons we were compelled to go over there. my question is, it wasn't al qaeda compromise the mujahedin? and supposedly we helped them back in 1979 so they could
protect their land against the soviet military. is that true? guest: the caller is correct. what happened is during the cold war in 1979, the soviet union after several years of trying to put a government in power, afghanistan found the government lost a lot of support because people rebelled against the policies. they sent in their own forces to try to suppress the insurgency. that failed. we worked with pakistan, china and other countries to supply weapons and build up the insurgents. we saw them as an ally to the soviet union. the soviets withdrew. we dropped the ball. our attention went elsewhere. that left pakistan is in charge.
after civil wars in afghanistan, the taliban arose, aligned with the intelligence service to seize power and tied to al qaeda. this relates to different countries. more radical factions. and then the al qaeda went to afghanistan and took root there and plotted the 9/11 attacks. we did not help al qaeda get established. century-old precedent that protected small business owners from >> this is a live picture of the u.s. senate. the debate has begun on the
nominations for elena kagan. the final verdict is expected later this week. right now senator al franken is speaking about the nomination on the senate floor. >> it has found that corporations have the same free- speech rights -- >> other coverage is on c-span2. we have an archive of materials regarding the nomination of elena kagan. it includes some of her speeches and peepers. later today we will break down the debate into individual speakers. that is all act c- span.org/kagan. today is primary day in three states. voters are at the polls in kansas, missouri, and michigan. we will have complete coverage later tonight on c-span.
>> over the years it has the come as close to being a religious issue as any defense issue ever has. >> the guest looks at the 25- year battle for the marines and politicians concerning the aircraft. that is on c-span [applause] . find the entire schedule at c- span.org, and join us on twitter. the retired coast guard admiral thad allen suddenly discovered on monday was fixed just-in- time. testing is underway to make sure that the well will hold up as engineers and checked both mud and cement for the top. if all goes well, the next step will be to inject cement into
the pipes underneath the blowout preventer. this is about a half-hour. >> good morning. for those of you watching, we're here in houston, texas. we're here to observe the injection tests, and later today, a substitute a successful test, the static kill of the macondo well-bore. it has been a busy morning. there was a hydraulic leak and discovered last night. the bp crews and contractors spent the night preparing those. they are repaired now. we're going through final six debriefings now to begin the injection tests. it will begin shortly. i cannot give an exact time. there are last minute checks on the golf. hopefully, the injection tests can be completed before noon -- there are last-minute checks honda valve.
the will be a last-minute decision to go ahead with the static kit. communicating as to the three purposes -- to make sure we have a clear flow path for liquids. this is done with something called the a base oil, followed by mud. the second regards the pump rate, in the third is to make sure we understand the pressures associated with that volume. we have established a thousand psi as maximum pressure going forward. once we understand all three, we have communication of the fluids, pump breaks, pressure. that will then provide the basis for a decision to proceed to the static kill later today. then it will begin to willmud into the choke line and blow up our vendor. they will begin at 1 barrel per minute, moving of up to two barrels per minute. it will be a very low rate of
injection because we do not need to do with at a higher rate as during the top kill. there is a pressure back on the will with thecapping stack. we don't know how much mud will be pumped in. it depends on the condition of the well itself. there are three types of areas that need to be filled. to make sure that neither-nor hydro carbons come through. we do not know the exact condition of the well. usually, there would be no way to enter the annulus from the top. otherwise, we did put it in through the static killed. that is the reason this is considered a diagnostic test in advance of the alternate, bottom killed. regarding the total volume of mud we have pumped in -- will very according to which part we are pumping into. we need enough to give us
pressure readings. there are various lines that will describe how much volume and pressure there will be. there are charts and automatic pressure readings on screens, being watched by senior leadership. i will join them when i finish this brief. i will be glad to take any questions. >> i'm from the ap. how serious was this week? how long do think it will be before the actual tests begin? >> the leak involved two valves on the kill side of the capping stack. and they began to lose pressure. we found that out in time and were able to block the valve should. had they failed, it may have caused hydro-carbons to go into the environment. that would have been bad.
they dealt with it overnight. we could have had hundred- carbons in the environment, had we not located it. it has been stopped. as soon as we get the injunction tests completed, which we hope to begin soon -- i broke away to give this brief. it is on a minute to minute basis. we will do the test and a couple of hours. the pressure will tell them whether to adjust the volume and pressure. >> i am from fox 26 news here in houston. what areas have been reopened to fishing, and how is the fda making sure that the fishes safe for consumption? we understand even the fisherman in the area are concerned that the smell tests are not enough. >> we opened almost 25,000 square miles on the southeastern
side of the closed. to fishing. that was approximately a week and a half ago. we're continuing to aggressively take a look. there are three things required. i am speaking on behalf of noaa and director of the fda. number one, there has to be a certain amount of time with no oil detected and the water. second, two tests must be done on the capture fish -- since retests by experienced people who understand whether there are hydra-carbons in the sample, and thirdly is a lab test done by the fda with a consortium of other labs. all three must house for anything to be considered to be reopened. if they have passed those tests, then they're considered safe. they're working in conjunction
with the states to make sure we are learning standards. the states have jurisdiction up to 3 miles. federal jurisdiction is beyond that. >> if the static till operation works, with the relief well drilling still be necessary? will they still be completed the? >> yes, the relief wells are the answer. there is a limit to how much we can know from the static of. if. annulus cannot be reached from the top, then can we seal the drill pipe -- if it cannot be reached? we would have to go to the bottom anyway. we need to go to the bottom to make sure that we fill the casing and any drill pipe, and follow that with siemens. this will not to be filled unless there is a relief well
done -- it will be followed with cement. they put the issue in the bottom, a cement plug. we're ready to move afford when they're done. then it will draw through that and will be 100 be left to go. they are offset about 4.5 p from the other right now, going down about 100 feet, at an incline of 2.9 degrees, by 25-foot sections. there will test the magnetic field around it. when get to the bottom there will drill in, and once there, would do the bottom killed by pumping in mud. i think it will be key to what happens with the static killed. once we get zero pressure, then the well from the static killed -- then there is an option to put cement in from the top.
that must be predicated on certain conditions. depending on whether we decide that, we will create a time line as to the bottom tier. if there is not involved, that would be between five and seven days. after the static of, we would look at commencing the bottom kill. if there is a decision to put in cement, the committee difference. >> my question is about the timeline. can you tell us specifically how long you think this that kill could take? the plan to stay here in houston at the headquarters of bp to monitor that? or will you go to the scene? >> i will be here through the end of the day, then return to washington. i have a coast guard representative on scene. he will continue to be here. the static kill can take, the entire process could take anywhere from 33 to 61 hours.
to fill the volume of the well with mud could take that long. 61 hours at the high side. but we should know by the character of the curbs of the volume going in and the barrels per minute compared to the pressure, at some point, where we are. we will no earlier that it will take longer to complete the job. >> i am with the "houston chronicle." any more clarity on the coast guard --when you will scale down the apparatus in losing a move to the recovery operation, away from the response? secondly, what happens to this crisis center in houston when the well is finally plugged? >> first of all, we have established we will be here as long as we need to, as well as bp to meet their
responsibilities as the responsible party. i have directed my folks that we will hold all of our response equipment and personnel in place in the local area their pending the final killing of the well through the relief wells. at that point, we need to assess dealing with the oil coming ashore. there is residual oil coming -- it is not that hard to -- it is not that easy to see. we have to be in a position to respond. it depends how much is out there, and how much we have to recover. our commitment is to be here, and to hold bp accountable. >> [inaudible] >> they have ongoing operations. i would refer that to bp. there will be activities with source control. seismic monitoring and continuing to check the well for a long time will be in order,
just in case something would happen. we will shift to how we finish cleaning up the oil on the beaches and marshlands. ultimately, we will have to start dealing with local communities and states on how clean is clean. we will have to have resources in place in case we have a weather systems that may be moved the oil around. we have some tar balls below the surface arriving. this will go well into the fall. we need to be able to respond through the end of hurricane season. >> operator, we're now prepared to take your response. operator?
can we give you the microphone? >> i am from cnn. the u.s. government released new flurry members yesterday. what is your reaction to this latest figure, and is it a surprise to you? >> as you remember, it was almost two months ago when we came up with the revised number, a government assessment. that was between 35,000 and 60,000 barrels per day. that was a range. i said we would try to refine that. we continue to do that. the numbers that were posted yesterday reflect an adjustable rate where it might have been over 60,000 to begin with. it may have dropped down into the 50,000 number with depletion.
we called the oil budget. once a you know the flow rate, then you can say how much was burned, and how much skimmed. and how much we can evaporate, and how much was affected by dispersants. you begin to have a conversation concerning oil that we have not yet found. noaa is doing testing for presence of hydro-carbons in the water. the flow rate is the first step. in the next couple of days you will hear our estimate announced asked to the oil budget. that will lead us to where we think we need to go on the oil yet to be recovered. >> another question from fox 26
news. you said the well would not be capped to your satisfaction until the relief wells finished it off with the bottom killed. however, i think there was report recently that bp was saying the relief wells may not be needed. they are costly -- they may not be needed to permanently stop the leak. was there any discussion between the coast guard, government, and bp about whether or not to go forward with those relief wells the? >> i have always said that the relief wells are the final answer. i have spoken to senior leadership at bp, including bob dudley. there is no daylight between us. this will not be done until the relief wells are done. that is from the national incident commander. it is understood by everybody. >> one more question from the associated press. can you give us an estimate as to how long the injection tests
might take over all? and how quickly will you know whether you can move ahead with the static kill, as quickly as later today? >> those were the discussions upstairs before i came down. we think it will take a couple of hours. as long as nothing else happens, and try to establish the flow path, volume, and pressure we expect from the injection tests, we will be in the static killed sometime this afternoon. microphone. >> i just had a question for you personally, as far as it -- you're getting pretty close to what could be the finish line. what is this like for you emotionally?
are you hopeful, anxious? >> as the national incident commander it would be my responsibility to speak on behalf of the nation. i do not represent any agency, bp, or anything else. all of our hopes are that this will come to an end, instead of an agonizing time for it the people of the gulf, and the states in general. this has been quantified as the largest maritime spill. we need to be mindful that we have long-term impacts. we need to be sobered by the fact that a lot of oil is stopped and then we are not dealing with the daily threat. but we need to assess the long- term impact on the ecology, and carmen, and golf -- and there are secondary and tertiary and has regarding social and economic results. i don't think there should be
cause for premature celebration. there is a lot of hard work to do. but the federal government and bp need to meet their responsibilities. >> another question? >> one more, then we will try our operator again. >> as to how much will has been spewing since the first day. the estimates of what we hear now are considerably more than what we thought and the beginning. i am wondering, do you feel like there was an effort to underestimate? why didn't they know back then? >> i think the extent of this spill and the amount of oil being spilled revealed itself over time. i will blow by the 1000 or 5,000 barrels that were estimated
early on. they are not consequential to me. we knew from the start it was a consequential spill and our efforts were never constrained by low flurry members. we came up with a 35,000 to 60,000 range of while ago. we have all long known that we were dealing with a catastrophic spill. what has made this difficult, has moved into another category, as we had oil coming up for a number of days under different wind and sea conditions. we had an aggregation of hundreds of thousands of patches of oil all the way from louisiana to florida, and tar balls in texas. the extent causes as big a challenge as anything. we were waiting for oil to come on shore at one place -- but try to defend the entire gulf coast.
the flow rate is important. we need to know that for the fate of the oil, as to recovery and long term damage assessment to the environment. but the early float rates and inaccuracies did not inhibit our response. in fact, for the first couple of days it was almost impossible to detect. the deepwater horizon being turned upside down and hitting the ocean floor did not allow us to accurately assess. >> enroll, we're having technical difficulties with the telephones. >> i'm sorry for the people on the phones. we'll take one more from the audience.
we would be glad to take questions if you are on line. >> [inaudible] [echo] how did they diagnose the condition of the well --chart and numbers show? [unintelligible] >> thanks. three things -- they need to make sure the path of communication for the liquid, based oils to be followed by mud, can be followed all the way down to the well. so they can make sure everything is open.
secondarily, they need to make sure it can withstand the volume. then we can understand how to measure the pressure. the most important thing will be measuring the volume going in, and the pressure it produces. we have three different sites where we will be taking pressure readings. those pressure readings will be transferred every 12 to 15 seconds by wireless modems down there, and transmitted of to the control room here in houston. in addition, we have an analog of meter, and and led the camera will be on, and being watched. they're five different gauges we will read to monitor the pressure. it tells us the capacity of the system to absorber of volume of oil or mud, and how much pressure we are exerting when the volume goes in. we have established a maximum
pressure of 8000 psi and saw the capping stack, to guide how much pressure is being used to push the based oil in. after several hours we will have a profile of how the mud will flow, although well will react to volume, and the kind of pressures we can expect to be generated. there will be curves established for filling the mud and to the casing, the casing and to the annulus. and the type of pressures we can expect based on diameter and volume. then we will track the mother goes in during the seventh kill against as pressure versus william lines. these are all charted. senior leadership and technical folks, and people monitoring the operation are watching those continuously. they are immediately displayed
on a graph of the injection test is going on. was that responsive? >> [echo] [unintelligible] when bp suspended operations in made the press and public were not notified until after the fact -- i'm wondering, can we expect more timely updates for the injection tests for the seventh kill operation? >> which test were you talking about? >> with the top kill -- was suspended for 16 hours, then it began. but the public and press did not know until afterwards. are we going to be receiving more timely updates the? >> and i think that you will. the fact is, the test could have been started while i'm here.
when the test is done, if there's something to be reported this afternoon, kent it does twice-per-day technical briefings for bp -- is nearly went on top of mind this morning, but i would expect reports and the status of the static killed during a technical briefing this afternoon. i will ask for it. >> we are prepared to take one more question from the line. >> good morning. >> hello, admiral. yesterday you said in the first five or six hours you have a pretty good idea of how well it is working. will that start by this afternoon? you'll be looking -- if success, you will be going, or what? >> i think so. it is dependent on the actual conditions.
as the pump the mud into the welcome and we start establishing a certain volume, and another pressure associated with the volume, it will begin to follow a line, or curve -- those curves will be pre- printed. so we will know if that ratio is connected with the casing-only, or casing-annulus which would take a wider diameter and require longer for the pressure to generate. we will know probably by the time we have pumped 200 to 300 barrels in their, then there should be differentiation and the pressure. it will take longer than that to finish putting in the mud. it is like filling the rest of the basement. but we should have an indication within the first 300 barrels injected. it is two barrels per minute. it should be within a few hours
that we can discriminate. >> thank you offer command. that concludes today is operational update. >> i was wondering, is there any concern that -- on the capping stack is deteriorating from holding back the flood? and is there any concern about time, that other leaks could develop? >> there are several weeks, one around the cabin staff itself, and some down by the blowout preventer. some are producing hydrates on the equipment itself. we do not believe they contribute to a structural problem with either party. we have literally hundreds of
thousands of pounds of apparatus sitting on that will head down there. it has been there for quite a long time, been subjected to lots of different pressures on it. we all need to understand the quicker we get this done, the quicker we reduce risks of any internal failure we are not yet aware of. it could be working, but we don't know, because we don't know the conditions deep inside. so, i cannot give you a cost for action quickly. the cost during hurricane season is cause enough to move fast. we have no definitive information regarding any structural integrity issues. but i cannot tell you which we could not 100% without him. we will take one more question, operator. >> [unintelligible] this final question comes from the associated press. >> what exactly does it mean
that the relief well can confirm if the static kill has worked? >> ascetic kill will increase the probability that the relief well will work, but the whole thing will not be done until the relief well is completed. -- the senate to will increase the probability. the static kill is a diagnostic test the will tell us more about the integrity. in the long run, drilling into the annulus and casing pipe from below, filling out with mud and cement is the only solution to the end of this. there should be no ambiguity about that. i am the national incident commander. that is the way this will end. it will be with the relief wells being drilled and the mud and cement . . >> thank you for joining us.
>> but what is the better scenario for the static kill? >> that is a valid question. a if. nnulus has not been compromised, there is something called a sealer at the top of the well -- you should not be able to get to the annulus from the outset. unless something has gone wrong, you should not be able to get into it from the top. if there is a problem, and we're putting mud down the well, and the volume gets to the point -- that is good to know for doing the bottom care. if it is compromised, it means somehow during the day you had oil or natural gas coming through it -- it could be just the park itself, not coming from the casing. that is what we do not know. the best way -- you can talk about static killed, but it is
the alternate diagnostic test for well integrity before we do the bottom tier. that is the most appropriate way to characterize it. we will know the path of the hydro-carbons when we're finished. >> that was the latest on the gulf oil spill cleanup efforts. bp says engineers have begun testing pumping mud into the blown out throat of the oil well. they are also looking at the blowout preventer and looking at if it can handle the process. we have been following the situation in the gulf. you can find out more on our website.
this is a live picture of the senate debating a elena kagan's @ nomination to be the next supreme court justice. >> she told me that she felt strongly about how harmful the district court's position would be to our nation's ability to succeed in the wars -- >> a final vote is expected later this week. full coverage is always available on at c-span-2 we will break down the debate later today online so that you can see what your senator has to say about the nomination. today is primary day in three states. voters are at the polls in kansas, missouri and michigan. we will have complete coverage
of the races later tonight on c- span and c-span.org. >> c-span programming, politics, books, history, is available anytime on c-span radio in the baltimore area. it is nationwide on serious satellite radio, on your iphone or ipad, online around the on your phone.w c-span radio is available any time. just call the number on your screen. it is free, but check with your telephone service provider for any additional charges. c-span radio, even more available on your phone. >> is there a link between autism and the environment? according to the center for disease pcontrol and
prevention, one in 100 children in the united states suffers from autism. that is an enormous increase from a few years ago. >> called a hearing to order. i want to thank all of you for being here today for this important hearing. as the mother of a 16-year-old daughter and the chair of this committee, protecting our children from harm calls substances is an issue that is extremely important to me, as well as chairwoman boxer has made this a cause for her state and for the country. this is why we are here, to highlight the latest scientific research on the environmental impacts on ossa -- on autism and other neurological disorders. we need to understand the latest science.
two decades ago, autism and other neurological disorders were little known, and common diseases. today they affect 1.1 5 million americans, and one in every 105 children born in the u.s. will be diagnosed with autism. that means that there will be more children with autism then in juvenile diabetes, yet there is still so little known about the disease, its causes or treatments. many of my friends have children with autism, and i know that the struggle not only with the treatment, but with never really knowing the cause. sometimes in washington we do not realize that the abstract numbers i just mentioned have a very real implications in people's lives. i know this because i meet families like one that is here with us today that deal with the
challenges of having an autistic child and the frustrations of not having the answers. there is no cure for autism yet, so it is clear that more research is needed. we need to look at the various factors that contribute to autism so that we can find a cure and develop better services and treatments for those living with the disease. with the rapid growth in the incidence of autism, congress took action in the combat in autism act of 2006, assigning $1 billion to combat neurological disorders to pay for screening, prompt referral services and research. in last year's recovery act, we invested over $10 billion in new research in mental health, including at least $60 million devoted to autism diagnosis and treatment. even with this increase in research funding, we must continue to do our part to make sure that researchers and medical professionals are better
equipped to make a diagnosis of autism or other narrow logical disorders. -- neurological disorders. early diagnosis and prevention can help children immensely and reduce the cost of lifelong care. where we do not have a cure, there are treatments and therapies that can enhance the quality of life for children with autism. as we know, children are more susceptible to environmental dangers than adults. they consume our air and water from closer to the ground. because their immune systems are still developing, they are more likely to become sick when exposed to environmental risks. along with the epa, the national institute for health and the department for children's health and research, we are studying chemicalsure to and the environment could affect our children's health, including autism spectrum
disease. the research being conducted will further enhance our knowledge of this and other disorders. these results will help us stem the increasing problems of these diseases and eliminate potential environmental dangers facing our kids. your testimony today will go a long way in helping us better understand potential environmental factors related to autism and what the state of the research is today. your stories will help us understand the urgency behind the research. i thank you all for joining us today and i look forward to hearing from all of you. now will turn it over to the chair of this committee, barbara boxer. >> thank you very much. i want to begin by saying that we are all very saddened by learning of the passing of your mother, senator, and our thoughts and prayers are with your family at this time. you have dedicated -- she has
dedicated her life to teaching children, and i know she must have been proud of you for founding the subcommittee on children's health. we dedicate this hearing to her. today, we look at the environmental factors that might harm the health of our children, including their ability to learn, think, and interact with other people in society. the epa and the national institute of environmental health science funded a variety of studies under a dutch developmental disorders including autism. -- a variety of studies on and narrow-developmental disorders -- neuro-developmental disorders including autism. while science is still working to identify the cause of autism,
exposure to toxic chemicals in the environment is one crucial area of inquiry. the children's center of uc- davis is conducting research on environmental health factors with autism, including chemicals potential impact on learning behavior's and the immune system. the research indicates that the occurrence of autism is growing. the federal centers for disease control estimates that on average, one in 110 children in the united states has symptoms of autism disorder. in california, state agencies are reporting a rise in autism. in its most recent report, the department found that from 1997- 2007, while the total number of people served by the department increased 56%, the number of people with autism grew 321%.
affect entire families and have financial effects throughout society. autism spectrum disorder has cost society between $35,000,000,000.-194160629 dollars annually. today's hearing focuses on research -- between $35,000,000,000.-194160629 dollars annually. -- $35 billion and $90 billion annually. environmental factors may be playing a role in making people sick. i am committing this week to ensuring that federal agencies are coordinating their efforts on this question as much as possible and that resources are there to help people that need them. this will include making sure
the communities to suspect they have a cause for disease can call on the government to investigate and address their concerns. my bill will also require epa to update the tracking system and the federal government's ability to investigate disease clusters. in addition, the safe chemicals act of 2010 introduced earlier this year will take an important step towards identifying and testing chemicals that can harm our children before they come to market instead of dealing with the consequences after the fact. we want to require that the chemical industry prove that chemicals are safe before they are allowed on the market rather than the reverse. right now, society has to prove that chemicals are not safe. we think the producers should have to think they're safe before they get on the market. help's hearing will enforce our efforts to protect america's children from environmental dangers, and i look forward to hearing from the
witnesses. i can stay until about 11:00, and then i will read the rest of the testimony, but i am very grateful to the senator for her leadership. >> thank you very much and thank you for your thoughts about my mother. lately, in her last few years she was mostly watching c-span and love watching senator boxer give speeches. should always ask where i was. [laughter] we have to do great witnesses to begin here. our first witness is with the office of research and development at the epa. he is the assistant administrator for the office of research and development at the epa and the science adviser to the agency. our second witness is with the national institute of health. she is the director of the national institute of a normal health sciences, overseeing
research related to autism another narrow developmental disordeand other neuro-developml disorders. her presence guided me to attend this hearing this morning. the work must go on. >> it is a pleasure to be here with you this morning. in the assistant director for the office of developmental research at the epa. it is important to discuss this issue, and it is a pleasure to be here with my esteemed colleague from the nih. this issue is tremendously important when we talk about the potential environmental impact on autism and other developmental disorders. i have two small children. i know how essential it is for us to do everything we can to
ensure that the health and safety and well-being of our children goes forward. autism can be heartbreaking disorder men may prevent many children from fully experiencing -- that may prevent many children from fully experiencing typical social interaction. it is characterized by social and parents, communication difficulty and restrictive repetitive pattern disorders. it is sometimes called autism disorder. there is a milder form known as asperger's syndrome. no one is sure what causes it. it could be genes, environmental
factors, or a combination. as you know, children are especially susceptible to chemicals in the environment because they absorb more of the chemicals in the environment than adults do and they have higher exposures to these contaminants. because of its extraordinary complexity, prenatal and early postnatal brain development can be disrupted by environmental exposures at much lower levels than would affect adults. there are critical windows of susceptibility, both prenatally and an early childhood. environmental contaminants can be significantly more severe and can lead to permanent disabilities. for these and many other reasons, we are especially concerned about the effects of environmental chemicals on
children's health and neurological development. improvements in diagnosis may be contributing to the increase in autism diagnoses, however, many publications have evaluated the rise in incidents in california from 1992-2006. they found that even when factors such as early diagnosis, it changes in diagnostic care and milder cases were taken into account, these did not fully explain the enormous increase. the true reason for the increase still remains unclear. additionally, from long term, a 10-year studies, we have found significant and surprisingly uniform timing of increases of
incident, from 1988 to 1999. the challenge is to determine what specific environmental factors may contribute to the onset or severity of autism and other neurological developmental disorders so that these can be reduced. at epa, we're conducting research to determine how environmental chemicals could impact the development and function of the human nervous system. our research program focuses on susceptibility to chemicals and the factors underlying that susceptibility. we're studying the relevance of the effect on human health. there are new models, including one that allows us to evaluate much larger numbers of substances in the same amount of time. we have an extensive extramural
resources program that includes the children's resource center that we work with hand-in-hand, and we are going to hear far more about that today, including the research of the university of california datacenter for children -- davis center for children's environmental health. to understand and characterize common functions of this disease, we have studies being done in new jersey and that several other centers on which we will be happy to discuss and which will be detailed in our written testimony. thank you for the opportunity to speak here this morning. >> thank you very much. dr.. >> [inaudible]
sorry, i will start again. i am pleased to present testimony today on research related to neurological development disorders and to specifically discuss the environmental exposure link to the development of autism spectrum disorders. i am the director of the national institute of environmental health sciences at the national institute of health, and the director of the national toxicology program at the department of health and human services. science has made considerable progress in understanding how the brain and nervous system grows and functions. it is becoming clear that disorders such as autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and learning disorders are likely due to a complex interplay of both genetics and the environment. our research indicates that environmental exposures,
including low dose exposures and lifestyle choices before a baby's birth and during early childhood, do have an effect on the developing brain. autism spectrin disorders are developmental conditions that have increased in u.s. children in the past several years. it has -- we have significantly increased our funding this year to $9.3 million. i am an active member of the interagency autism coordinating committee, a group of federal agencies, authors, advocates and parents to plan and coordinate the research agenda. our two large efforts on autism are the early study and charge. in early study, researchers at the university of california and john hopkins university are studying mothers who already have one child with autism and who are pregnant again. this study is one of the largest studies of its kind. it will follow 1200 mothers
during their pregnancy and their new babies until the age of three to identify it prenatal and postnatal exposures that may be linked to autism. the charge study, which you will hear much more of fact, was coordinated by the nih/epa children's center at the university of california davis. it is looking at a wide range of environmental this -- environmental exposures and the development of early childhood. the study is falling more than 1600 children in california from three groups, children with autism, children with other developmental disabilities, and normally developing children. so far, the most frightening findings relate to children with autism and point to a need for further study. it is important to note that this study found no difference in mercury levels between
children with autism and normally developing children. i am happy to report that the american recovery and reinvestment act allowed us to increase our support for autism research. our funding is being used to study air pollution,pfc's, endicott and disrupting chemicals, smoking, alcohol use, and other potential risk factors for autism. this is an important part of our overall investment in children's neurological development, which totaled more than $29 million last year. development of the nervous system begins in the womb and extends throughout childhood. during periods of rapid development, the brain is a tolerable. even small children exposed to
critical events can have significant effects on the brain. for example, the amount of lead that is toxic to an infant is much less than would be toxic to an adult. many studies have shown that mercury is also a developmental toxin. mercury and the arsenic found in drinking water is associated with the decrease in intelligence. but these are not the only things that affect i.q., intelligent and learning. a study shows that a mother's exposure to agent released from burning fossil fuels and tobacco can adversely reflect -- affect a child's iq.
the iq points of children exposed for almost five points lower than those not exposed. pour blood specimens were e blood specimens or analyzed. the research showed that children who had higher concentrations of flame retardants scored lower on tests of mental and physical development. chemicals can also affect behavior. early exposure is associated with aggressive behavior at different age levels from toddler to adolescents. in cincinnati, it was found that childhood exposure to lead and teenage exposure to tobacco are factors that contribute to 80 hd, possibly accounting for one- third of the cases in -- contribute to adhd, possibly
accounting for one-third of the cases in the united states. exposure during pregnancy leads to problems and depression in children. our harvard center has just released a report showing an association between exposure to pesticides and development of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. in summary, environmental influences on brain development, behavior and other neurological outcomes of public health concern are a rapidly growing area of environmental health sciences and a top priority for us. we believe that our research well under -- will advance our understanding of these conditions, including autism, provide new information for prevention and treatment for children. thank you for the opportunity to testify. >> thank you to both of you. i was just trying to put myself
in the shoes of a pregnant mother or someone who has a baby that they are afraid has autism, trying to figure out the state of the research. your comments are something we all believe that chemicals to affect children's development in the brain. that is what i worked so hard on the children's products bill with the lead. i wanted to narrow in on the autism issue. you mentioned two things specifically. one of the studies showed no difference in the mercury level of kids with autism and those without, is that correct? >> that is correct. i think the doctor will talk more about that. >> you also mentioned a difference in the immune systems. could you elaborate on that? >> i can give you the bottom line which is that it appears
that the immune systems of these children may be altered. they may be showing more symptoms or symptoms that may develop into our community. again, i think the doctor will talk more about those findings, but i think it is important to understand that auto-immunity is another issue that is been rapidly increasing of the past 10-20 years. >> could that be the key to us trying to figure out the cause because it is the one difference that has been found? >> i think the point is that there is growing suggestion that environmental factors may be playing a role in the increase in auto-immunity, and part of the syndrome, if you want to use that word for autism spectrum disorder, may involve alterations in the immune system. >> so what you're saying is that finding that there is a difference in auto-immune
systems, we know that could be a factor in response to the environment, and how one response to the environment could determine who has autism and who does not? >> it could be one part of the puzzle. i think the role of in my mental factors in the increase of autism -- i think the role of environmental factors in the increase of autism is indicated not only by work done at uc davis, but the cdc has done continual analysis of the fact that one in 70 boys is now developing autism. >> some people say that it is diagnosis that they did not do before, but you both believe that there has been an increase. >> the study coming out of the uc davis group that was referred to clearly shows that,
at least in california, only 30% of the increased incidence can be potentially due to differential diagnosis. >> i would just add that in addition to the study that was just released, there is an additional study worldwide that shows that it cannot be attributed -- the rise in incidents cannot be contributed to changes in diagnosis alone. there are a couple of very important point. this window of susceptibility is something that cannot be overemphasized. when we talk about the doses or levels of mercury, we need to recognize that that is not the entirety of the story. when you are exposed, whether it is in utero or early childhood, it can be a difference in reaction because of the level
and stage of development that you're in. merely because one person may be exposed to the same levels as another, that is not the entirety and that is something that is a very important area for research. the other is that we often get into this discussion about, is it environmental or genetic. i think that there is a growing body of knowledge that would say that it is not one or the other. as the doctor just reported, genetics cannot change this quickly in order to explain the increase in incidents. what we are seeing is an interaction of the environment and genetic susceptibility where certain triggers are released because of environmental exposures. >> thank you. >> first of all, thank you very much both of you for your clarity. i remember many years ago, when
i was in local government, meeting parents who had children with autism. back then, they were being told that it was the way they were raising their children. there was something wrong with the mother-child relationship. honestly, i saw the look on parents' faces. they were devastated. that is where the science was. clearly, we have moved to a different place now, where we are looking at the jeans and we are looking at the chemicals that either the parent for the child have been exposed to, so i think there is a very important message to parents out there. do not give up hope. we are going to figure this thing out. the fact that we are only spending $9 million on autism, something that affects one out of every 110 children is just amazing to me. it goes to where our priorities are. so i want to ask the director,
could you lay out for me, how much did you get in the economic recovery and reinvestment act to facilitate your research, and if you could slowly tell me what that is exactly? >> nih got $10.4 billion under the stimulus act. niehs, including our superfund program, got about a hundred and $90 million to conduct research under the stimulus act. however funding was about $9 million -- no, $11.5 million, excuse me. about $4.9 million of that was stimulus funding. >> i am confused. how much of the economic recovery act funds that went to
nih is being dedicated to autism research? >> specifically, of the $190 million, about $5 million. our base funding in two dozen 9 -- in 2009, a4 was about $ million -- in 2009, was about $4 million. it is hard to say exactly because we do see autism as a priority and we are trying to increase our funding. >> i will hope that you will let us know. all of us here care about this.rat if you feel you could do more with more funding, let us know, because it is clear to me that
we're coming along. we are narrowing down. maybe there is some susceptibility to certain chemicals and toxins because of certain genes or other factors. that is why, putting that together with our cluster bill that we're introducing, and the bill on making sure that chemicals are safe before they're introduced, it seems we have a clear path to where we're going. that really covers my questions. thank you. >> thank you. senator udall. >> thank you both of you for focusing in on this issue. i would like to put my opening statement in the record and then go directly to questions.
of like to cite a few -- i would like to cite a few facts to set the stage. children today are surrounded by synthetic chemicals. two hundred of them are na euro-toxic in adults, yet less than 20% have been tested for neurological toxicity. these are chemicals that the u.s. imports or produces a rate of more than 1 million pounds per year. according to the epa, over 40% of these have not been tested for basic toxicity. i would like to ask both of you, do you think the suspected links
between chemical exposure and autism and other neurological disorders show the need for chemical-makers to provide more information and health studies about their products? part of that, yesterday, part of the question, i do not know if you saw the post yesterday, but on the front page was an article about boxes of cereal. kellogg recall shows the u.s. did not know the risk of many chemicals. one of the chemicals highlighted -- one of the facts highlighted been at the story was the chemical companies did not test the chemicals, because then they would be required to turn it over to the government. they decide, we do not want to know what is anna because we do not want to turn it over. will you talk -- we do not want
to know what is in it because we do not want to turn it over. will you talk a little bit about the need to test chemicals? >> i am not in a regulatory agency but a research agency. i think the issue is that there is growing evidence, lots of evidence, that chemicals can have an effect. we have known for years that the earliest warning you put on drugs is do not take if pregnant. that is because the drug could hurt the fetus as it grows. we know the chemicals can impact many things. many chemicals are not tested at all. many of us do believe it would be much better for chemicals to be evaluated for safety before they go on the market. the chemical of concern into the cereal boxes is a chemical that has had some limited testing
done to determine whether it causes genetic damage. that is the extent of the test that has been done for that. i think it would be very important to have the testing done first. i think we have to really work on what we mean by testing. there is a pattern that has emerged that there are guidelines for how do you do testing. the problem is that the guidelines that were established in 1970's are really not what is needed in this century. we need to be -- we need to focus our efforts on using all of the newest information, not necessarily things that were required 20-30 years ago to do the test. the other point i would like to make is that susceptibility and the interaction between genes and the environment. i think it is a very, very clear that the pendulum of your
genetics and your past exposure can alter your susceptibility. i just saw a paper that shows that some of the flame retardants, whether or not you see developmental or toxicity in animal studies, is totally dependent on in the genetics of the mouse and tested in. while mice are not men, they provide us with a great deal of information about what is possible within a population. i think paul is going to talk more about the regulatory agenda. >> i taught chemistry at yale university. one of the things that we always taught our students is that when you introduce a new chemical into the world, when you make chemical and allowed, you need to characterize it. there is a wide range of analyses that are done in order to describe exactly what that chemical is. traditionally, part of that chemical characterization has not included its impact on human
health and the environment. as long as that exists, the way you are describing a chemical does not include its impact on humans, on the environment, and developing children, we are going to be in the same situation. we need to have a couple under standing of the definition of performance when we are talking about chemicals, even commercial chemicals. it needs to include how it performs in terms of its role in the world and the direction it is giving to the environment. >> thank you both for both answers. i am sorry because i have to leave. i have to preside over the senate. i am leaving you in the hands of two very capable senators to i know are very concerned about this issue. thank you very much. >> thank you.
first, doctor, i am just trying to figure out the exact amount of money and trying to match these numbers. you said you have spent $9 million on research? >> $9 million on autism research in fiscal year 2009, and approximately that in 2010, but that is from our total portfolio of about $21 million. it is about one-third of the total. >> so $21 million for neurological research, and about one-third of that is for autism. >> correct. >> in the recovery act, we invested $10 billion in mental health research, and 6 million -- $60 million of that was to go to autism research.
>> much of that has to do with treatment and diagnosis. >> said you are differentiating that from the research into causes. >> approximately $5 million of our funding is from that $60 million. there are four nih institutes that are very involved. they're involved in autism research. it is not just us. >> bucket, that makes a difference. -- ok, that makes a difference. we had an incident in minnesota, and i talk to some families in a somalian community -- we have a very large sum mullion community in minnesota, and dick -- somalian community in minnesota,
and they have a very high rate of autism. i am wondering how that could possibly fit in with the research going on, because of course, they are searching for answers. senator boxer was talking about clusters. they live in this area, but other kids who are not somalian do not have this high rate. >> there are some recent hypotheses that vitamin d or the absence of a vitamin d may be associated with an increase in autism. my understanding is that there is essentially no reports of autism in somalia. again, it is a developing country so they may not have the diagnosis, but it is a phenomenal cluster of somalia and children being reported with autism in minnesota and elsewhere in the northern united states. people are suggesting that that might be related to not having enough vitamin d.
so that is a hypothesis is that people are beginning to look at. >> i would just suggest that while this is certainly an important area of research, it lends itself to something we discussed earlier, which is the genetic environment interaction rather than one or the other. it is so important. this dance, if you will, of people with genetic predispositions not necessarily exhibiting a certain disorder in the absence of being exposed to certain triggers, and yet, when exposed to certain triggers, can exhibit those disorders. it is an important area of research that in my opinion needs to be emphasized. >> this interaction -- and i suppose this could be an example -- that if in fact,
there is more optimism among somalia's in the united states than in somalia, it could be an indication of genetics being triggered by environmental factor. >> that is why we are recruiting women who already have one autistic child. there is a higher likelihood that a second child might be autistic, suggesting that there is clearly some genetic component to it. however, usually if you have one child, your environment does not change that much if you have a second job, so there is also the interaction going on here. but in the early study, not only are we looking at every kind of environmental factor that we can think of people, including diet and stress, we are also looking at the economics of these women, children and their partners as well.
>> i want to hone in on the one child, to the child, three child. what do we know? what are the chances, if you have had one autistic child, of having a second? >> i believe you have about a 10% chance. your next child might be. i think that is the popular opinion, one in 10. that is much higher than the one in 100. >> so, that lead to further to suspect that it is something either in the genes and the environment combined? >> right. when you have a genetic input and not every child is impacted, then it says that there has to be something in addition to genetics that is causing the condition. >> do we have other neurological
conditions that have been found to be caused by both teams and the environment? >> -- both genes and the environment? >> there are suggestions that things like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder may have an interaction. we know that when you look at something like lead, which is a clear neurological toxin, that not every child had the idea lost. you have to look at a whole population of children to see the the shift. >> if this proves out -- and we do not know that -- is the objective of gene therapy? >> i think that the importance of understanding environmental traders is that you can change your environment, but at -- environmental triggers is that
you can change your environment, but at this point you cannot change your genes. i think you can get to the environmental impact more easily and more readily. the affect of the gene may only be spread in a given environment. >> but would just like to add that this area of genetics that is emerging, it is called epi- genetics, and it is an emerging area of investigation. i would certainly described as in its early stages. this is something that indicates that environmental interactions are triggering these genes to
impair the ability to suppress the expression of a gene. it would not necessarily stop with the individual but can be translated into future generations as well. i would never suggest that this is established, concluded science, i am saying that this is emerging science research. >> let me just ask my last question. we know that in america, one in every 110 kids is born with autism. what do we know about other countries? you need to turn on your microphone. >> sorry about that. i do not know the exact statistics in other countries. i do know that the increase in autism appears to be in many countries. one of the issues that we keep getting is the differential diagnosis. are we changing our criteria? are we looking in a different way? it is clear in the united states
that that does not explain the increase reques. >> so from what you know, there appears to be a worldwide increase. >> it appears that way. >> they probably do not have a health care system in somalia capable of doing what we do, but given what the senator said about that cluster, it might be very interesting to look at the gene situation and if that is somehow making these children in your state more vulnerable. i do not know if we have any data from somalia. >> we would certainly be eager to entertain a grand where someone proposes to study the population. it needs to be done on a prospectus fashion. there are so many children being diagnosed with autism in the population.
you might be able to do something similar to what we are doing in philadelphia, california and maryland as far as recruiting in the population. >> the reason i think it is important -- i mean, i was stunned by the number, one in 28 children. that is a cluster. i think we could learn quite a bit. i need to run off to my next obligation, and i just wanted to say how much i will look forward to hearing about the next panel and to thank everybody for being here. we are going to be taking action on a lot of these matters. when you mentioned salle aids -- pthalades, we were able to ban those in children's products. it was an enormous fight.
it was an enormous, enormous, terrible, awful fight. we got in a fight about rubber ducks and one person saying they were fine. yes, but they are not. let's make them without the chemical. we managed to do it, but it is very difficult to regulate this one chemical at a time. that is why the work you do is so very important, because hopefully, you'll be able to identify for us a class of chemicals that may be problematic and give us a road map that we need so that we do not have to get into these arguments one particular chemical at a time. >> thank you. i want to thank our witnesses. we know there is a lot more work to be done, but thank you for the updates. i think it helps us understand the funding, the status of the research, and to understand and learn new things.
welcome to our second panel. i see that our first panel is staying. thank you for that. we would like to hear your reaction to this later as well. our first witnesses is the director of the uc davis children's center for environmental health and disease prevention. he is an expert on how environmental factors interact to influence neurological development. in the middle is the director of the cincinnati children's environmental health center and the principal investigator for research examining prenatal and early childhood exposure is too
prevalent environmental hazards. finally, i would like to extend a warm welcome to marry mullins. she is a minnesota mother is here to share her experience of living with an autistic son. i believe he is here today. where are you max? thank you for being here today. i've understand you are a wizard with maps and directions. maybe you could help my husband. [laughter] thank you for being here. mary is here with her family to help us put a real face on the stories behind autism and other neurological development disorders. thank you very much for coming from minnesota. we will get started with a doctor. >> thank you for giving me the opportunity to prevent --
present testimonies regarding environmental factors and autism risk. as have already heard, autism spectrum disorder's encompass a wide range of severity, such as a high rate of seizure disorder and anxiety. there are several disorders with distinct ways of getting there and ideologies. there is a common set of behavioral criteria. although autism risk has as strong irritability, seems that no single agent is sufficient to account for the phenotype. potential susceptibility genes may be spread across the entire genome. recently, several rare genetic mutations and other factors that
influence expression of the dna message or shown to contribute to the complex transmission of what is some risk. genetics alone -- of thought is some risk. genetics alone -- of what has risk. genetics alone cannot account for the increase in diagnosis. interactions among multiple genes are likely to contribute to the occurrence of autism, and environmental exposures are likely to significantly contribute to susceptibility and variable expression of optimism and autism-related trades. of autism and autism-
related trades. the rise cannot be fully accounted for by changes in diagnostic criteria. there is exposure to foreign chemicals of an anthropogenic stores and changes for the diet that contribute to risk and severity. private resources continue to support work on identifying genetic experiments associated with autism risk. we have learned that genetics alone cannot predict the majority of cases, the pattern of the parents, so very, nor can they predict the success of treatment modalities. moreover, we learned that many of the molecular and cellular systems associated with the rest are the same ones that are
targets of environmental chemicals currently of concern to human health and children's health in particular. current research is needed on definable factors that contribute to causing or protecting against autism. it is accepted that autism has multiple factors contributing to risk, and therefore it is essential to bring together both studies of genes and environment to fully understand ought to is some risk. -- autism rest. isk. we must identify which environmentalists boaters and combinations of exposures are contributing -- which environmental exposures and combinations of exposures are contributing to the rest.
-- to the risk. only by bringing together teams of scientists can we identify which of the more than 8000 chemicals -- how this contributes to susceptibility. lead exposure to these chemicals is the only current way to mitigate and prevent autism cissus -- susceptibility in individuals. >> thank you very much. >> thank you very much for the opportunity to be here. i wanted to focus my testimony
on other narrow developmental disorders. we have talked quite a bit about autism. children's environmental health has grown tremendously in the past decade or two. it has been fuelled by the emergence of more at diseases in children. mounting evidence implicating environmental exposures as major risk factors for some of the most common diseases and disabilities in children today. research indicating that many -- have their origins and early childhood. what happens in childhood have implications for a person's ability. in contrast with many other research, at this research
offers promise to prevent some of the diseases affecting america's children. one in six american children have developmental problems. the data at -- many of these diseases appear to be rising. the findings from from of the most widely dispersed environmental toxins indicate that exposures exceedingly low levels are risk factors for deficits. executive functions are those things that distinguish us from other animals. none of us would be sitting here today if we did not have good executive function. this is becoming increasingly important. we also know that there are many risk factors for many behavioral problems such as at&t and criminal behavior -- adhd and
criminal behavior. they can dramatically diminish the ability to contribute to society. we have heard about several emerging toxicant and there is emerging evidence that a whole host of environmental chemicals , such as flame retardants, pesticides, airborne pollutants, are associated in steadies the intellectual or behavioral problems. the evidence is not as conclusive. much of the research was from the children centers in collaborations' for the centers for disease control. i want to share to state a few highlights to highlight the impact of a low-level talks
then on children and society as an indicator of the extent of the seriousness of what we have always thought of as a subtle problem. it would mean 3.5 billion more children who would qualify as being mentally retarded. these are not subtle a fax. -- settle a fax. -- effects. they could be attributed to prenatal tobacco exposure. we have confirmed that child lead exposure -- as well as
criminal arrests. these studies suggest a large proportion of crimes and homicides over the past century can be attributed to lead toxicity. we do not think of low-level exposure of being in a consequence, but the levels you're talking about are the same concentrations that we try to achieve would entice psychotics. -- anti psychotics. for every dollar that we invest in preventing lead exposure, we would benefits $34 billion per year. let me just end by saying that
we talked about the research and that is increasingly important. we cannot ignore the pattern of pathology we have seen with other established toxicant. it is clear to me that we know enough to require market testing for a whole host of other environmental chemicals. the alternative is to continue to experiment on our children and it is no longer tenable. we should also look back to the history of drug regulation. of people a handful arguing that we needed better regulations. it took the epidemic for us to take action. perhaps optimism is the equivalent for environmental chemicals. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, senator. i am happy to be year to date with my husband and my 10 year-
old son. thank you for the opportunity to speak with you about the effect of autism on my family. when he was 3 years old, he was diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder. as a preschooler, and the social situation was very challenging for him. he became difficult to manage outside the home safely and was increasingly bothered by it loud and high-pitched noise is, spells, and talked. his reactions were explosive and often dangerous. his brother was born during this time and the stress of a new baby and an uncontrollable three-year-old was more than we could bear. we took him for lengthy evaluations through minneapolis public school and medical assessments at two different autism specialty centers. the school district gave him an
educational label of auspices -- autism spectrum disorder. the doctors and psychologist reports of similar findings. at the time he was diagnosed, many around me were asking how he got autism. we suspected a genetic link, but it did not matter. i was focused on moving forward to help my son. everything we read about treating autism told us that early intervention was key. we bought books, went to conferences, and begged for consultations with over scheduled experts in the field. we learned what methods would be most effective, but were frustrated to find waiting list as long as 6-12 months at facilities that offer these services. i quit my teaching job and my husband come back on his orthopedic surgery practice. it became our mission to put together an appropriate treatment plan that would address his unique needs.
when he began kindergarten, we learn that our local community school did not have an autism program. although his reading and math skills were far above grade level, his poor social skills and lack of self control men team needed more support. we had to send into a school outside of our community and doing so created even more impediment to making friends. our goal was to bring his skills to a point where he could be fully mainstream and move to our committee school by the first grade. this took a lot of hard work. he has now been at the school for three years. life was somewhat easier now, but not without struggle. we made the difficult decision to give him medication to control his impulses and stay calm. things like playing nine sports
team, making friends, and going to summer camp, carefully planned and prepared for him. setting him up for success takes understanding is challenges as well as the tremendous amount of time and forethought. while things looked pretty good, we never really know what will set him back or how long he will need our help. we hope you will continue to excel academically and going to college and be a productive and happy adult. in contrast, his 48 year-old and unemployed and socially isolated. people like her, with undiagnosed and untreated autism, are an example of autism cost to our economy and society. i now feel like i can look beyond our situation and address some of the questions others were asking me.
as families of children with autism, we each struggle with the why. i do not believe we can come to a simple conclusion when it comes to the cause and effects of such a complex disorder as audited them. there is an urgent and growing need for resources for early identification and intervention, ongoing treatment, medical care, and social services for children and adults with autism, it is also imperative that we focus resources on continued research so that we can identify its cause. until we have done the extensive research necessary, we cannot leave any stone unturned or rule out any possible factors as the cause of this disorder. thank you for the opportunity to share my story with you today. >> thank you so much.
thank you it for your courage. thank you for that and for all the work that you have done. to your story sound eerily similar to some of my friends to basically give up their jobs as well and focused on trying to figure out what was wrong and how to fix it. i would think that knowing the root cause would obviously make it a lot easier in figuring out the treatment. could you talk first about to some of the impediments you have? i know minn. it is one of the medical meccas and a good place to be when things go wrong. do you want to talk about some of the obstacles and what you think can be done to improve that? >> initially, there was a lot of shame. the behavior see war as exhibiting more more embarrassing than anything else.
-- the behavior he was exhibiting. just admitting that there was something that was different from his peers. it was fairly easy living in a metro area with the minneapolis public schools during the early childhood screening to get into special education. the appointments to get in with autism specialists were six month long just to get a diagnosis. we did know it wasn't autism at the time. we're looking at all the different options. >> when you listen to the testimony about some of the research that is going on, what is your reaction to that? you thought it could have a
genetic link. what has been your own journey in trying to follow the research and figure out what is going on? >> my journey has been a very recent because i truly have not felt that i have been able to look outside of my little world until very recently. i am not surprised because i have two sons, and they both have the same manaunt. there have always been questions about what it could be. i do not think we can stop looking at that. >> thank you. doctor, we were talking earlier with -- about the charge study and what has been going on there. she mentioned that you could help to further eliminate -- there must be preliminary findings.
>> there are. >> on the immune system issue and relation -- >> the emea does regulation in children with autism seems to be standing out based on comparisons with the case control comparison groups, including those with developmental delays in the study without autism and narrow typical children. if i had to summarize what the major impediments are in the immune system, it would be inflammatory behavior of the immune cells. in the presence of antibodies that recognize proteins within the brain, we found these both in the children, but also in the
mothers. we have no idea how these -- >> could you just tried to explain that in layman's terms? >> inflammatory behavior of the emmy in system is essentially one hallmark of the immune dysfunction. it can damage both immune responses, and is now known to influence narrow development -- neuro development. >> it reacts a lot? >> it is hyper responsive in a particular way. >> you have this hyper responsive emea system and then you mentioned -- one could argue that is that it reacts to some environmental factor. >> that is a very good point.
we have started to examine whether immune cells from children with autism respond differently to antibiotic exposures. the two that we have examined thus far is mercury and the flame retardants. we picked the latter because we now have evidence that flame retardants and others have presented evidence that flame retardants pact -- to interfere with both the developing nervous system and the immune system. possibly through common mechanisms. >> what was the thing you said about the protein in the cells? >> they are antibodies that recognize self. that is not supposed to happen. it could promote disease.
for the mothers at risk, we found that their system have antibodies that can react with fetal proteins. during gestation, these antibodies can cross the barrier and have an influence and have the possibility of having an influence on the developing fetus. we do not know why mothers at risk would have these auto antibodies and these are things we are examining now. >> in your testimony, you said that genetics could not account for the majority of autism cases currently being diagnosed. do you want to elaborate on that? >> yes. there are some genes that have been associated with autism, but when you look at the percent of cases which have these genetic malfunctions, for each gene that is typically less than 1%.
the cumulative total, it may be as high, but no greater than 20% if you at all those up. there is a large fraction of optimism that really has not been attributed to genetic contribution. >> i think you heard my story of the somalian kids in minnesota. do you have any opinion on that and what could be going on there? >> that is certainly intriguing and deserves more study. >> we will get you the information on it. >> ec davis is working on a project called -- learning early predictors of autism. can you be more specific in describing the aspects of this project and what the intended goals are? >> this project is recruiting
women at high risk of giving birth to an autistic child. this is based on inclusion criteria. the women must already have one biological autistic child and the family. the goals of the study is to study the biology of the women involved, including taking blood samples, urine samples, labor and delivery samples, as well as following the child for the first three years after birth. such a longitudinal study is being modeled after the predecessor of the other study. we have about 170 women enrolled. our target is about 200 for this project. the retention of women in this study, because it is very arduous for the participants,
has been better than 90%. we are very pleased. >> very good. you mentioned the emerging evidence that new environmental chemicals have been associated with autism. can you elaborate on the information? the think the priorities are on track or the research being done across the country? >> it will be importing to begin to understand mechanisms about how these chemicals may impact children and at different stages of life. what we have begun to do much more carefully is used -- is measure how much of a chemical a
child is exposed to and then see how that plays out, how it impacts the trajectory of learning behavior's and so forth. those kinds of studies will be getting -- will continue to be extraordinarily important. againstook at children -- if we look at children with adhd, if a child is exposed to lead in childhood, about a 2.5 in creased risk. if they are exposed to high levels of both tobacco and led, they are over eight times more likely. this idea at looking at interactions is quite important.
it seems to me that we do know enough to take action and develop regulations. even if we develop these regulations, there will be plenty of all of us to do. we will not be out of work. although about would be wonderful. -- although that would be wonderful. we need to act on the evidence that we have. it does not mean that each new chemical has to be studied to death. there is still quite a bit that needs to be done to look at these new emerging chemicals. some of them are acting as in the credit destructors. -- in the current -- endocrine disruptors. >> you mentioned the buyout
markers. >> that is extraordinarily important. we can take explicit measures of exposures that may occur over pregnancies, for example, at sold during the cincinnati hold steady, -- exquisite as an accurate measures. look at those at different times so we have measures three times during pregnancy. 16 weeks, 26 weeks, and that delivery. we can ask questions about whether there is a difference in the timing of exposure. exposures at 16 weeks was
associated with acting out type behaviors in the daughters. but not in the suns. that needs to be confirmed. that is a type of research that we cannot make policy based upon one study. it suggests that timing is important. looking at gender differences based on the chemical. we could not have done that without a buyout -- biomarker. >> do you want to add anything? them nowi understand and we are almost on equal footing. i am kidding. >> i think that by identifying classes of compounds, up we may be able to invoke a cautionary principle where if a chemical has properties we know to be
retained in the body, that children are more exposed, that we might be able to predict as opposed to testing every chemical. there are various levels of testing chemicals. given the vast number of high- volume and even greater number of other chemicals in the environment, and it behooves us to try to find some commonality among chemicals in their mechanism of producing. >> what about the fact that boys seem to have a higher rate of autism? i am trying to understand this as he was talking about the relationship with gender. any ideas? >> i think it is the important factor that needs to be
acknowledged in our current and future research. obtaining cells from males may be different than obtaining cells from females in terms of the level of susceptibility. we need to keep that in mind. >> if you could -- if we could write you a blank check right now, what would you most -- if you could conduct the research that you wanted to in a big way, where would you want to focus their research? -- focus your research? what would you do? >> because of the complexity of autism spectrum disorders, are lesson learned is that you need
a multi disciplinary approach. you need to have a neurologist, a toxicologist, integrate their efforts of understanding this complex disorder. concerted studies of specific populations will give you a valuable answers that could lead to mitigation. >> do you want to answer that? >> given the prevalence of optimism pot -- of autism, it would be large. you would have multiple measures of various chemical exposures and the opportunity to go back to using a repository. look at the children as they develop. it that would be -- that kind of
large study is going to be an essential part of understanding the risk factors for the development of autism. >> very good. i want to thank all of you for coming. we will keep a record open for 2 weeks. i wanted to commend you for the work you are doing. after struggling and doing -- i know how that feels. that is what a lot of us are doing on behalf of moms and dads like her across the country. it does appear that the solution may not be an easy one, but this interaction with genetics and the immunology as well as environmental factors is where we should head. i want to thank you for all the
been talking about the nomination. on your screen now -- debate on elena kagan nomination is expected to last until about 8:15 tonight and continue into tomorrow. the full senate is planned for later this week. starting later today, we both read down the debate into individual speakers. he can see what your senator has to seek -- say about the nomination. >> today is primary day in three states. kansas, missouri, michigan. coverage on the races tonight on c-span and c-span.org. >> we are not ruling any options
in, but we're not ruling any options out. >> this month marks the 20th anniversary of the first gulf war. videoat d.c.'s ban library online. -- is at d.c.'s ban video library online. >> mervyn king recently testified before the british treasury committee. during this hearing, he also told members that there was no rush to raise the interest rates. he is joined by members of the monetary policy committee. this is about 2.5 hours.
>> i hope our sessions together will prove constructive. i am grateful to the committee for allowing this session to take place today so that i was able to attend the meeting earlier this week. we took a further step forward towards a new global deal for capital and liquidity requirements for banks. in the years ahead, said stronger capital standards will help to ensure our financial system is more robust. we reaffirmed that it is important to implement new standards over a long transition period it because bank balance
sheets are still recovering. we need banks to be able to expand their lending to support the wider economy. the gradual improvement in credit conditions seems to have come to a halt in recent months. the financial markets have been more volatile. that is because continuing concern about the ability of some countries to achieve necessary fiscal consolidation are affecting confidence in the ability of their banks to repair their balance sheets. the key underlying causes of the crisis in terms of global demand have not been tackled. those imbalances are likely to be larger this year than last.
until these problems are resolved, uncertainty about the outlook will remain. last week, we learn to -- we learned about the gdp growth in the second quarter. we must be careful not to wait too much -- read too much into one number. we cannot be confident that the recovery and command output and employment here in the u.k. will be sustained. we continue to face the challenge of rebalancing our economy away from consumption toward net exports and raising our national savings rate. there is a risk that the level of money spending in the u.k. will remained weak. that would push down on inflation, potentially to a rate
that is significantly below the 2% target. there also risks on the upside. c.p.i. inflation is currently above the target of 3.2%. given the changes that we announced in the budget, it is likely that inflation will remain above target for most of next year. if the work to become ingrained, it would be difficult to bring inflation back down again. in balancing those risks. to do so, there is a debate on how hard we should be pressing on new accelerator. in the months ahead, it might be that the inflation outlook warrant pushing down even harder.
the debate is about the appropriate degree, not about applying the brakes. there will come a point where we will certainly need to ease off the accelerator and returned bank rates to more normal levels. i look forward to that time because it will probably be a signal that there is a smoother driving ahead. with the economic outlook improving. i fear there is some considerable distance to travel before we can begin to use the word normal again. we stand ready to answer your questions. >> governor, i am very grateful to you. i find a little bit of its elliptical.
when you read this statement, he said that -- you use the word monetary accelerator. >> interest rates and quantitative easing. and that is the instrument under control. >> you are arguing that we may need further -- you would not exclude the possibility of employing measures. >> i am arguing that we have room to use monetary policy in either direction. i will not prejudge where it will need to go. we are prepared to do so in either direction that seems appropriate.
>> if i may broaden this discussion, is your view that we should lift up from the accelerator? >> it is quite extreme. that was exactly the right thing to do. i think things have changed. the international economy is turning around and is operated much more strongly. the recovery is on even. -- uneven.
it is certainly much stronger today than it was a year ago. the economy is turning around, demand has picked out. we saw the second quarter figures. they raise concern -- the last two major business surveys we had and the quarterly industrial trends for rate. the amount of capacity that is in the economy, including unemployment. the performance of inflation has not been the way that we anticipated last year will me put in place -- we have seen inflation run much higher than
we thought. >> i think we remain in a difficult situation. there were two risks, one is inflation having been a public market for an uncomfortably long time now. it will be difficult to bring it down. on the other side, there is a risk that the growth we have seen might dwindle direct underlying inflation pressure may fall to a level that takes inflation then meet the target. it is difficult to set monetary policy when there are such risks. the most likely outcome is that inflation does fall back to the
target level. i think it is the right thing for it now. so far, this year i have managed to keep the interest rates flattens. that is not just about balance sheets. >> there is a balance of risk on either side. making use slightly inclined toward some tightening. >> i think there are other factors that david pointed to which led a majority of committee members to make no change. we do not need to set policy in
advance. >> do you think that the budget may be risk of a double digits -- a double dip recession more likely? >> the committee does not assess the impact of only one measure. i will save the economics of that for the committee. the aim of that was to try to deal with some of the downside risks that might have arisen had we not set out a medium-term plan to eliminate structural deficit. the biggest risk that we face are those coming from outside. the conditions are in place for a rebalancing of the u.k. economy, but we do need a prosperous euro area for the exchange rate of sterling to be able to lead to an increase. it made a significant
difference to whether or not -- there has been a change in government. there was a full coalition agreement between the two partners and one of the coalition partners is a democrat t. around the 14th of may, the deputy prime minister met with you and he said that you had a long conversation that caused him to change his mind on the pace and how the consolidation
should be. what did you say it to the deputy prime minister then about your views? >> i said nothing that was not already in the public domain. the election was on a thursday and the results were on a friday. later that weekend, there was the european assaad--- the ga.opean sab on wednesday, there was the inflation press conference. in response to the open request
for the new government. the following saturday, three days later, i had a telephone conversation with the deputy prime minister. to i basically repeated what i had said in the first conversation. >> your position had not particularly changed? >> no. not at all. >> did you feel comfortable being drawn in to sensitive matters are around that time? did you feel comfortable with the deputy prime minister citing this conversation with u.s. one of the primary factors in changing his position? >> i do not think we ever feel comfortable when they are drawn
into comments made by politicians. he asked for me to express my views in public. i did that at the press conference. i was asked if i would accept a telephone call from the deputy prime minister on a saturday morning. i think it would have been unreasonable not to accept it. >> did you feel that you were used in any way? >> there was nothing i said that i did not say in public. i try to make sure that the advice i give -- >> let me ask about demand. there it's been a lot of a debate about the figures are related to the private sector's ability to create jobs.
depending on what way -- >> there are two parts to this. on public-sector employment, they are in a much better position we are then -- to judge. the implied employment is something that we would take from the obr. that is one that we will reach. we have not made that judgment yet. we are working toward our overall deal on the economy.
>> if it is more sluggish than expected, how do you think the government should respond? do you think they should quit their program of fiscal consolidation? >> it depends on how sluggish it is. the first response would be that the automatic stabilizers will clear. they will reflect how strong or weak growth is. the stronger the deficit, -- it
is up to the monetary policy committee to respond. other things being equal, that would lead to an inflation outturn. we would expect to make a policy adjustment for that. once the automatic stabilizers and monetary policy have responded, the degree of sluggishness -- it is totally open to the government to change its path. the most important point about the fiscal -- you should have a path out there that demonstrates a clearly specified way in which we will get to a point where the ratio in debt to gdp would begin to start falling back. even under the current plan, it
goes on the rising until the end of that. it is very important to demonstrate that there is a plan under which at some point, the ratio debt to gdp would begin to fall back. >> i want to hear more about quantitative easing. you said it was a very difficult decision when you start adding. what concerns do you have around the proposition itself? do you worry that it will set a precedent about inflation?
what did she say that it was such a difficult decision? -- what makes you say that it was such a difficult decision? >> we had never done it before. there was no doubt about the direction of these things. we could work through a range of channels. point -- that is tricky. when you change the interest rates, you are never quite sure where you need to start.
you are doing something that you have not done before. >> how will you unwind it? >> that would be a starting point. we are setting up a process where we need interest rates to be changed first when it comes to changing policy. >> that is regardless of the impact on the public purse? >> we would not want to do
something that would cause volatility. we will talk to the debt management office. the impact on the economy comes primarily if the impact on the community itself. to generate the right level of inflation on the top end. >> are you concerned about the public scrutiny on what essentially is an experiment that we have taken? are you concerned about the lack scrutiny on this enormous program, which is essentially an experiment?
>> you can quiz us on any aspect of this. >> this is a misunderstanding about the nature of profits. the taxpayers should look at the combined effects of those taken together. it is a perfectly standard monetary operation. you are injecting money into the economy. it is unusual. this is the opposite of that. we're trying to prevent inflation from falling too fast. that is what it is about. there clearly has to be scrutiny to ensure that the -- we have a
that when it comes back to the overall judgment. there is a very substantial contraction, which was pulling down the money in the economy. i would be more concerned with its if i felt it was growing at a rate in terms of the inflation outlook. >> believe quantitative easing -- you leave quantitative easing for a while.
>> i do not think so. inflationary expectations will reflect monetary policy. the reason why we would begin with that rate and then move onto a program is because we do not think it would be sensible to make discretionary decisions month by month. they know the program. we should not begin days until we are in a position. you would have a program of preannounced sales over a six- month period. month period.